Docket Nexus — Federal court records.
Patent Lawsuit

Harchula v. Conrail

Patent Terminated 08/12/1988 District Court, W.D. New York

Harchula v. Conrail is a federal patent lawsuit filed on 11/10/1986 in the District Court, W.D. New York. The case was terminated on 08/12/1988.

A lawsuit records allegations and procedural activity. Being named as a party does not establish liability, wrongdoing, or the merits of any claim.

Court
District Court, W.D. New York (W.D.N.Y.)
Official Court Website →
Docket number
Nature of suit
830 Patent
Infringement of a patented invention.
Jurisdiction
Federal question
Date filed
11/10/1986
Date terminated
08/12/1988

494 Patent cases in this court are indexed here.

Parties

About Patent Lawsuits

Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Harchula v. Conrail?

Harchula v. Conrail is a federal patent lawsuit filed on 11/10/1986 in the District Court, W.D. New York. The case was terminated on 08/12/1988. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

What type of case is this?

It is classified as “Patent” under the federal nature-of-suit system. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

What court is the case in?

The case is in the District Court, W.D. New York.

When was the case filed?

Harchula v. Conrail was filed on 11/10/1986. It was terminated on 08/12/1988.

Other Cases Involving These Parties

Related Patent Cases

Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 8763830 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket). Court, party, date and judge fields are reproduced from that record; case-type categories, statute decoding and all aggregate figures are derived by Docket Nexus (methodology).